Riding the Raisina Tiger

Riding the Raisina Tiger - a Politico-military thriller about an Army Chief who decided to take things into his own hands. AVAILABLE FOR FREE DOWNLOAD ON 26 JAN ON OCCASION OF REPUBLIC DAY FROM https://www.amazon.com/Riding-Raisina-Tiger-Story-military-ebook/dp/B01ALCCNSS

Blogitorial

Click to read the article on Swordarm

Custom Search Engine - Scans Selected News Sites

Loading

Monday, 16 December 2013

Chinese troops
apprehended five Indian nationals in Chumar area of Ladakh well inside the
Indian territory and took them to their side of the border, in perhaps the
first such incident along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

The five people
were handed over to Indian side by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops
after efforts were made in this regard under the existing border mechanisms
between the two countries, sources said here.

The five Indian
nationals, along with their cattle, were apprehended by the PLA troops a few
kilometers inside the Indian territory in Chumar area and were taken to their
camp across the LAC in an apparent bid to stake their claim on the area, they
said.

The army
headquarters sought to play down the incident, saying that the matter was
resolved “amicably”, but sources said the Chinese side relented only after the
local Indian Army authorities sought a flag meeting on the matter and warned
that the issue would be raised at a higher level. It is learnt that the local
army authorities on both sides established communication on the issue, they
said.

The incident has
come after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed the Border Defence Cooperation
Agreement with China in October, seeking to prevent any flare-ups between the
armies of the two countries on the LAC. — PTI

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20131216/edit.htm#5

A victory that
went beyond the battleground

The Bangladesh War
marked a spectacular victory over Pakistan and defeated the Two-Nation theory
on the basis of which Pakistan was created. It was India’s first foreign
military intervention in the backdrop of a hostile United States and China that
surprisingly was fought without a strategic aim or vision.

Dinesh Kumar

Exactly 42 years
ago on 16th December 1971, Lieutenant General Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi, who
headed the Pakistani forces in East Pakistan, signed the Instrument of
Surrender to India’s General Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Army
Command, Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Aurora, in Dacca (later renamed
Dhaka). That one-page landmark document signed at the end of a 13-day-war
marked three simultaneous historic events — a spectacular Indian military
victory over an abject Pakistani defeat, the territorial break up of Pakistan
leading to the creation of Bangladesh as an independent sovereign nation; and
an ideological defeat of the idea of Pakistan with the ripping apart of the
Two-Nation theory that stipulates a Pakistan for the Muslims and an India for
Hindus.

By the end of the
war, 93,000 Pakistanis had surrendered to Indian forces marking the world’s
largest surrender in post World War-II military history which remained the case
until the large scale surrender of Iraqi forces to the US-led coalition in the
one-sided 1991-92 Gulf war. All this by a nation that had attained freedom
after being partitioned by the British colonialists only 24 years earlier. The
1971 India-Pakistan war was the third war India had fought in a preceding short
span of nine years, one of which had resulted in a humiliating territorial
defeat to China in 1962 and a second that had resulted in a lost victory to
Pakistan in 1965.

In all previous
post-Independence wars and military engagements, the Indian armed forces had
fought to either defend or consolidate the territorial integrity of the
country. And thus this Bangladesh War, as it is known, was the first ever
military intervention by India in a sovereign country. Indeed this war presents
a fascinating study of war preparation and military tactics and, yet, a lack of
strategic thinking; a spirited fight given by the Pakistani soldiers in the
face of all odds and despite sound logistical planning by the Indian Army; some
delicate diplomatic balancing with the great powers; and both international and
domestic power politics. Just how well India handled both the run up to and the
conduct of the war is borne by the fact that most western scholars, especially
Richard Sisson and Leo E. Rose in War and Secession: Pakistan, India and the
Creation of Bangladesh, have acknowledged the Bangladesh war to be a sound
example of implementation of all the key principles under the Just War theory
or justum bellum – the jus ad bellum and jus in bello clauses which,
respectively, are about the ‘circumstances’ and ‘conduct’ of war.

East-West
differences

Differences
between East and West Pakistan, which were separated by 1,200 miles across a
large Indian land mass, had begun immediately after Partition with a strong
lingual grievance after Mahomedali Jinnahbhai announced in his first and also
the last visit to East Pakistan on 21st March 1948 that Urdu would be the
national language of Pakistan. This eventually led to the February 1952
language riots that resulted in police shootings and deaths. While this
provided the initial spark, the long list of severe dissimilarities and
grievances were all too pronounced – lingual and cultural differences, lack of
representation of Bengalis in both the government and the military, uneven
economic development between East and West Pakistan, failure of the government
to make a constitution that lasted, and, subsequently, electoral mismanagement.

The point of no
return came after the Central government in West Pakistan reneged from its
announcement to convene the post December 1970 election for national assembly
in which the Awami League would have, with its numerical majority, formed a
government with Mujibhur Rahman as Prime Minister following a first ever free
and fair election. What followed instead was a severe military crackdown on the
night of 25/26 March, 1971 which turned out to be, as described by no other
than Niazi, ‘a display of stark cruelty more merciless than the massacres of
Bukhara and Baghdad by Chengez Khan and Halaku Khan or at Jallianwala Bagh by
the British general Dyer’.

The magnitude and
extent of the repression was subsequently acknowledged and detailed by
Pakistan’s Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report and by even General Agha Yahya
Khan, the President-cum-military ruler at that time. The military crackdown had
continued throughout the year leading to massacres that claimed between a
conservative 26,000 to a staggering 3 million lives.

Repercussions for
India

These incidents
had serious repercussions for India which eventually led it to militarily
intervene. India was forced to play host to a massive 10 million refugees
(9,899,305 to be precise) that were accommodated in 825 relief camps spread
over 2,800 km across several states bordering East Pakistan making it perhaps
the largest influx of refugees after World War-II and the 1947
British-facilitated Partition of the Indian subcontinent. Of these 10 million
refugees, as many as 7.2 million had entered India within a short span of four
months. The refugees, who cut across all religious persuasions and every strata
of society, were accommodated at tremendous cost (US$ 500 million followed by
another US$ 700 million as calculated by the World Bank which is valued much
higher today) and accounted for less than half the world’s refugee population
that stood at 27.6 million at that time. Yet, as the International Commission
of Jurists noted, the UN did not take note of the large scale human catastrophe
and treated it as an Indo-Pak issue.

The huge refugee
problem considerably added to the adverse economic, social and political
strains in the already overpopulated, poverty stricken and trouble-torn north
eastern states where Pakistan had been allowing Chinese operated training camps
in East Pakistan for Naga and Mizo rebels. Economically, in addition to
considerable drain on resources, the influx of refugees was affecting the job
market in an overcrowded labour market thereby depressing wages and inflating
prices with 3 million refugees having entered the job market. The Left parties
had been quick to exploit some of the legitimate complaints in West Bengal and
Tripura over the economic impact of this influx. On the sociological and political
front it was threatening the internal stability of a complex political system
in the tribal north eastern states which pitted indigenous communities with the
‘outsiders’ and added fuel to the Nagas and Mizos fighting its secessionist
battles.

No cake walk

Even after getting
about seven months to logistically prepare for the war and the fact that India
had stopped Pakistani aircraft from overflying Indian airspace while blockading
the sea around both West and East Pakistan, the Indian Army fought a tough
battle which had in fact begun with Indian troops entering East Pakistan on
21st November, i.e. 12 days before West Pakistan declared war on India by
launching air strikes on 3rd December 1971.

Surprisingly, as
brought out by Lt General Jack Fredrick Ralph Jacob in his book Surrender at
Dacca: Birth of a Nation, there was no clear strategic aim and no considered
overall strategy. Even until 13th December, i.e. three days prior to the
surrender, Dacca was not on the agenda for capture. The focus was more on
capturing towns and cities which until then didn’t make strategic sense. Even
otherwise both Lt General Jacob and Lt General Niazi (The Betrayal of East
Pakistan) bring out in their respective books that the Indian Army met
considerable resistance and was forced to fight a tough war despite complete
air and naval superiority over the Pakistani forces.

The Indian Army,
which lost 1,421 soldiers and 4,058 wounded with another 56 soldiers missing,
presumed dead withdrew from newly created Bangladesh 13 days ahead of the
scheduled date of withdrawal and before leaving assisted in quickly rebuilding
bridges and roads, clearing mines, opening ports and repairing runways. On the
western front India fought a relatively ‘holding’, ‘limited’ and defensive’ war
and did not take advantage of the situation to settle the Kashmir issue by
military means which has been met with some severe retrospective criticism.

The Indian
government looked after the prisoners far beyond the requirements of the Geneva
Convention which has even been acknowledged by Niazi who narrates how the
Pakistani prisoners lived in concrete barracks and according to their
respective ranks while Indian soldiers lived in tents. In contrast, Indian
soldiers were tortured, beaten and humiliated by the Pakistani army. Further,
India refused to handover the captured Pakistani troops for trial to the
leadership of newly formed Bangladesh despite knowing well that many had been
guilty of perpetrating repression in East Pakistan. But the safety of the Pakistani
prisoners was guaranteed under the Instrument of Surrender, a unique clause not
found in most surrender documents.

Tight rope and no
lessons learnt

At the
international level, India had to balance an anti-India Nixon-led US regime and
a pro-Pakistan China to which India had only nine years earlier lost a war. A
week after the war begun, a hostile United States despatched its naval Task
Force 74 centred around its nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Enterprise to
the Bay of Bengal. The war ended shortly before its arrival but by then the UN
was breathing down India to end the war. Only four months earlier, in a major
balancing act, India had managed to sign a 20 year Treaty of Friendship with
the Soviet Union which until then had been supplying light weapons to Pakistan
but on India’s request kept vetoing UN attempts at ceasefire.

Yet 42 years
later, the shortcomings remain the same and continue to haunt. The Research and
Analysis Wing (RAW) then lacked operational intelligence which remained the case
in the subsequent military operations in Sri Lanka (1987-90) and the Kargil War
(1999). Coastal security and capability of launching amphibious operations
remains deficient (evident 37 years later during the 26/11Mumbai terror
attacks) as does logistics preparation (evident during Operation Prakaram in
2001-2002) while the post of Chief of Defence Staff remains an illusion and
strategic thinking a casualty. Indeed India remains an unenviable case study
for the adage ‘those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it’.

Prominent turn
arounds

A.K. Fazlul Huq, a one-time member of the
Muslim League, had ironically moved the historic Lahore Resolution in 1940
seeking the Partition of India and the creation of a Pakistan. The same year he
left the Muslim League to form the Krishak Sramik Party. Soon after
Independence, Huq declared at a speech in Kolkata that he could not accept the
idea of two Bengals. “…India exists as a whole…I shall dedicate my service to
the cause of the motherland and work with those who will try to win for
India—Hindustan and Pakistan—a place among the countries of the world”.

Another prominent Bengali and member of the
Muslim League, H.S. Suhrawardy, who moved a resolution on 9th April 1946 for a
Pakistan that included Bengal and Assam as a Muslim majority Pakistan, later
shifted to India where he lived in exile for some years before returning to
fight for Bengali rights.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20131216/nation.htm#15

Give reasons for every ruling, SC tells AFT

R Sedhuraman

Legal
Correspondent

New Delhi, December
15

The Supreme Court
has directed the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) to give reasons for its ruling in
every case to facilitate consideration of the appeals.

Since the apex
court’s judgments had “widespread ramifications,” it was necessary that the SC
decided the appeals after assessing AFT’s views in each case, a Bench
comprising Justices TS Thakur and Vikramajit Sen explained.

The Bench issued
the directive while considering an appeal against an AFT order giving partial
relief to Naib Subedar Narsh Chand in the matter of seniority and pension.

“We have carefully considered
the impugned judgment but are unable to locate the reasons that have persuaded
the AFT to grant only partial relief. There can be no gainsaying that where a
component of the relief prayed for is being denied it is an imperative that
reasons should be disclosed for doing so.

“This is as important as
justifying the grounds on which the grant of relief is predicated. We would be
handicapped and accordingly remiss in taking up the issue of the reliefs that
have been granted, without having the benefit of the views of the AFT,
especially since our decision will have widespread ramifications,” the Bench
pointed out.

Sending the appellant back to
the AFT for appropriate remedy, the Bench said it had clarified in another case
that there was no vested right of appeal to the SC against the final decision
of the AFT. It was imperative that every appeal to the SC should be preceded by
a plea made before the AFT to the effect that the controversy raises a question
of law of general public importance.

In the event that the AFT
disagreed, it was necessary for the appellant to apply for leave of this court
in terms of Section 31 of the AFT Act, 2007, the SC ruled in the verdict
delivered on December 13.

Pension case

An SC Bench issued the directive while
considering an appeal against an AFT order giving partial relief to Naib
Subedar Narsh Chand in the matter of seniority and pension

The court said: “We have carefully
considered the impugned judgment but are unable to locate the reasons that have
persuaded the AFT to grant only partial relief

We would be handicapped and accordingly
remiss in taking up the issue of the reliefs that have been granted, without
having the benefit of the views of the AFT, especially since our decision will
have widespread ramifications, it said

Washington: Army
chiefs of India and the US have reviewed the ongoing army-to-army cooperation
and opportunities to further strengthen bilateral cooperation, including
through joint training exercises and military exchanges.

The review was
undertaken at a meeting here between India's Chief of the Army Staff, General
Bikram Singh and his US counterpart General Ray Odierno during General Singh's
on December 2-5 visit to the US.

General Singh also
utilized the opportunity to discuss the US-India defense relationship with
other senior US military leadership and advance India's military interests,
according to a statement by the Indian embassy here.

The visit assumes
special significance in the light of enhanced defense cooperation between the
two countries over the last few years and rapidly increasing engagements under
the framework for India-US defense relations.

The Army Chief
visited important defense establishments of the US military and met a number of
high-ranking defense and civilian officials in Washington.

General Singh was
inducted into the Carlisle; Pennsylvania based US Army War College (USAWC)
International Fellows Hall of Fame, an outstanding honor in the international
military community.

Singh who is an
alumnus of the USAWC having graduated with the class of 2004, was honored for
"having made a significant and enduring military/humanitarian contribution
to international peace and stability" while holding the highest military
rank in India.

He delivered a
keynote speech to the USAWC graduating class of 2013-2014.

During the visit,
General Singh was honored with a full honors ceremony by US Army Chief of
Staff.

Major General
Rajeshwar Singh welcomed the chief of Myanmar Army to the CIJW School on behalf
of the Indian Army chief General Bikram Singh.

This was a part of
the last leg of his six day visit to India. At the CIJW School, Soe Win
witnessed training activities and demonstrations by the Army staff. He also
held discussions on key issues concerning training and enhancement of military
ties between the armies of the two neighbouring countries.

Major General
Rajeshwar Singh said that the visit of Soe Win assumes importance since army
contingents and military officers from Myanmar come for training at the school
on a regular basis. Since December 2010, there has been no contingent from
Myanmar to the institute.

The vice senior
general is looking for more army-to-army interactions and his visit would
certainly enhance defence cooperation and augment the growing relationship
between the two countries, Rajeshwar added. It is to be mentioned that during
his current visit, Soe Win met President of India Pranab Mukherjee in New
Delhi.

India and Afghanistan have agreed to deepen
defence and security cooperation to increase the operational capabilities and
mobility of the Afghanistan National Security and Defence Forces (ANSDF).

Afghanistan
President Hamid Karzai said his talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
especially in military training and equipment, were “very productive, resulting
in satisfaction for the Afghan side.”

In an interaction
with journalists and strategic affairs experts here on Saturday, he said, “We
hope to have an army to defend Afghanistan through its own resources and its
own citizens. To that objective we are being helped by India.”

Afghanistan had
given a wish list of military equipment as well as sought greater cooperation
in building up a battle-capable ANSDF. India was wise to carefully weigh the
implications of greater defence cooperation, he said.

The President
declined to give details about the wish list, but noted that this cooperation
was on for a long time.

Besides defence and
security, Dr. Singh and Mr. Karzai on Friday also agreed to work with Iran for
developing new trade routes to facilitate trade and transit to Afghanistan and
beyond. One of these is a land route beginning from the Iranian port of
Chah-bahar. It enters Zaranj on the Afghan border from where India has built a
road feeding into the garland highway connecting major Afghan cities. A spur
connects Afghanistan to Central Asia, thus opening up further prospects for
India’s trade and economic drive in non-traditional markets.

Mr. Karzai said
both Kabul and New Delhi had applied for land at Chah-bahar to set up
administrative and trade facilitation offices. He wanted Central Asian
countries to also participate in this endeavour.

The President was
confident of India going ahead with $11 billion Hajigak iron ore project, but
pointed out that the Afghans were being very cautious about opening up its
mineral resources for exploitation to prevent them from becoming a source of
trouble as is the case in some African countries.

On the Bilateral
Security Agreement (BSA) that has seen Mr. Karzai and United States officials
exchange harsh words, he said both India and Afghanistan wanted U.S.\NATO
troops to continue being stationed in the country. “It is good for Afghanistan
as they will fill a certain vacuum of resources and bring to Afghanistan in a
larger way a sense of stability.”

“We also discussed why we
should have the peace process launched before the BSA and why we need complete
protection of citizens. So the Prime Minister and I agreed on the need for
Afghan conditionalities to be fulfilled. They need not frame it that way. Both
are necessary – their presence in Afghanistan as well as protecting Afghan
homes against attacks.”

Asked if the U.S. might walk
away completely if the BSA, in its present form, is not signed, he laughed away
the suggestion, describing it as “brinkmanship.”

Talks with Taliban

Mr. Karzai described talks
with the Taliban as the “need of Afghan people”, but drew a distinction between
those who are with terrorist networks in their actions and outlook and those
drawn into insurgency due to circumstances beyond their control and that of the
Afghan government.

He disapproved of the killing
of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan’s Hakimullah Mehsud a day before he was to hold
peace talks with Islamabad. “The U.S. should have given an opportunity to
engage in talks. It should have waited to see if those talks would be
successful.”

The President praised Pakistan
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for expressing his desire “in very clear words” for
an improved relationship with Afghanistan and India.

According to a Ministry of
External Affairs release, Dr. Singh conveyed India’s confidence in
Afghanistan’s ability to build a strong country that also contributes to
regional peace and prosperity. The two leaders also agreed to work on further
strengthening regional cooperation, it noted adding that India is hosting the
next meeting of the Senior Officials of Heart of Asia in January.

Like many other
parents, their father, mother, and other relatives joined in to congratulate
the two boys who on Saturday walked their ‘antim pag [Final Steps]’ out of the
hallowed portals of the historic Chetwode building to become officers in the
Indian Army.

Nephews of a
Kargil martyr, Vivek Giri (23) and Vishal Giri (24), are brothers who passed
out together from the Indian Military Academy (IMA) on Saturday. Their father
is a Subedar in the Army. “My uncle died in the Kargil war and that inspired me
to join the Army. It isn’t about death. The Indian Army is all about honour and
integrity,” said Lieutenant Vishal Giri after his epaulette was adorned with
two stars post the passing out parade.

Rachit Pande (23),
who graduated in Chemistry, reiterated that living up to the tradition of the
Indian Army even at the cost of his life was his goal. “My father is a Colonel
in the Army but that did not inspire me to join the Army,” Lieutenant Pande
said.

With 617 Gentleman
Cadets (GCs) crossing the portals of the Chetwode building on Saturday, the
number of officers who have passed out of the IMA since its inauguration in
1932 reached 54,188.

Of the GCs who
passed out, the highest — 105 — were from Uttar Pradesh. This was followed by
80 from Haryana, and 46 from Uttarakhand.

So far, a total of
1,614 Foreign Gentleman Cadets (FGCs) have passed out from the IMA, of whom 71
FGCs participated in Saturday’s passing out parade.

Of this year’s
FGCs, 52 were from Afghanistan and the remaining 19 FGCs were from the friendly
foreign countries of Bhutan, Kazakhstan, Mauritius, Nepal, Tajikistan, and
Kazakhstan.

The number of FGCs
from Afghanistan has increased in the last two years with the increase in the
number of seats for Afghans in the IMA and the National Defence Academy (NDA).

Sixteen senior
officers from the Afghan Army, some of whom were accompanied by their families,
witnessed the parade. These officers were trained at the IMA between 1974 and
1982. The officers said it gave them a great sense of pride to return to the
land which helped Afghanistan and continued to do so.

Defence Minister
A.K. Antony, who was the Reviewing Officer at the parade, commended the GCs for
maintaining ‘high discipline standards.’

“We are a peace loving nation,”
Mr. Antony said. He said no one should perceive this as a sign of weakness.

Mr. Antony congratulated the
Army for showing unprecedented valour while handling the catastrophe that
struck Uttarakhand in June this year. “I would like to congratulate all the
officers and men of the Indian Army and the Armed Forces for the exemplary
courage shown during the unprecedented calamity in the State of Uttarakhand.”

The Sword of Honour was
awarded to Akshat Joshi for best all-round performance. He was also awarded the
Silver Medal for standing second in the Regular Course.

A resident of Chandigarh,
Lieutenant Joshi is the first in his family to be in the Indian Army. “Had I to
choose between the Army and my family, I would always choose the Army and my
parents would want me to do the same,” he said.

Lieutenant Joshi said what
most of the Army officers would do was to live by Chetwode’s motto according to
which safety, honour, and welfare of one’s country came before everything else.

Kamlesh Mani was awarded the
Gold Medal and Vicky Duhoon was awarded the Bronze for standing first and
third, respectively, in the Regular Course.

The Silver Medal for standing
first in the Technical Entry Scheme Course was awarded to Ashwin Nagpal and the
Silver Medal for topping the Technical Graduate Course was awarded to Ratan
Singh.

Bhutan’s Kuenga bagged the
Silver Medal for the best all-round performanceamong FGCs.